District of Massachusetts • 1:26-cv-11670

#1

Apr 09, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-11668877 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Sachin LNU. (Attachments: # 1 Category Form, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet, # 3 Exhibit Immigration Documents)(Shaw, Elizabeth) (Entered: 04/09/2026)

#2

Apr 10, 2026

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge Indira Talwani assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge Donald L. Cabell. (CEH) (Entered: 04/10/2026)

#3

Apr 10, 2026

Judge Indira Talwani: ORDER CONCERNING SERVICE OF PETITION AND STAY OF TRANSFER OR REMOVAL. (SEC) (Entered: 04/10/2026)

#4

Apr 10, 2026

General Order 19-02, dated June 1, 2019 regarding Public Access to Immigration Cases Restricted by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c). (SEC) (Entered: 04/10/2026)

Apr 10, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment

#5

Apr 13, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#6

Apr 13, 2026

Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

#7

Apr 13, 2026

Judge Indira Talwani: ELECTRONIC ORDER allowing nunc pro tunc [ 6 ] MOTION for Extension of Time to April 15, 2026 to File Response/Reply to Habeas Petition. (SEC) (Entered: 04/13/2026)

Apr 13, 2026

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

#8

Apr 15, 2026

Answer/Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - 2241

#9

Apr 20, 2026

Response - not related to a motion

#10

Apr 22, 2026

Judge Indira Talwani: ELECTRONIC ORDER: Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ 1 ] on April 9, 2026. On April 10, the court entered its Order Concerning Service of Petition and Stay of Transfer or Removal [ 3 ].On April 15, 2026, Respondents filed their Response [ 8 ], in which they assert that Petitioner’s detention is “[a]uthorized by 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)” but acknowledge that, “should the court follow its reasoning in Doe[ v. Moniz, 800 F. Supp. 3d 203 (D. Mass. 2025)]” and similar cases, “it would reach the same conclusion that Petitioner is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226[.]” Resp. 3 [ 8 ]. In the alternative, Respondents argue that Petitioner, who “was recently arrested and charged with Breaking and Entering for a Felony” in Massachusetts, “falls squarely within” 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c)’s mandatory detention provision. Id. at 4.Petitioner has since informed the court that his pending criminal charges were “dismissed for failure to prosecute” on April 16, 2026. Reply 4 [ 9 ]; see Reply Ex. 1 [[9-1]]. In light of this development, no later than April 24, 2026, Respondents shall inform the court whether they still maintain that Petitioner is subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) and, if so, provide the legal authority for their position.(SEC) (Entered: 04/22/2026)

Apr 22, 2026

Order

#11

Apr 24, 2026

Extension of Time

Apr 24, 2026

Order on Motion for Extension of Time

#13

Apr 28, 2026

Response to Court Order